Re: Haldane's Dilemma - clarifications - and Felsenstein [LONG]

Haldane made numerous wildly unrealistic assumptions IN FAVOR of
evolution. That makes it powerful -- as an anti-evolutionary problem.
Your simulation goes beyond that, to make even more wildly unrealistic
assumptions EVEN MORE IN FAVOR of evolution.

Malcolm wrote:
Initially all alleles are unfavourable.

In other words, your simulation begins with ONLY BENEFICIAL mutations,
and NO harmful mutations.


Every generation there is a single mutation,
which switches a random locus from one state
to the other.

Your simulation eventually lowers to a fifty-fifty split between
beneficial mutations and harmful mutations. This wildly unrealistic
behavior: (1) gives an unrealistically high beneficial mutation rate,
and (2) drastically reduces the cost of mutation (the cost associated
with eliminating harmful mutation and fending off error catastrophe).
Your simulation radically minimizes the cost of mutation -- which would
ordinarily take large portions of the available reproduction rate.

Your simulation excludes some costs (such as the cost of segregation)
-- which would ordinarily take substantial portions of the available
reproduction rate.

Your simulation EXCLUDES all beneficial recessive mutations, and their
substitutions -- which have a very high cost of substitution.

Your simulation EXCLUDES the cost of UN-successful substitutions --
which can be substantial in a realistic population (and even moreso if
beneficial recessive mutations were included).

Your simulation has a tiny population size, which substantially reduces
the cost of substitution. (This is amplified by the fact that your
assumed beneficial mutation rate guarantees a beneficial mutation every
two generations,on average, REGARDLESS of the tiny population size.)

Your simulation uses a version of extreme truncation selection, which
unrealistically favors evolution.

Your simulation has A VERY HIGH REPRODUCTION RATE, (vastly higher than
humans), with females producing 1000 offspring. Together with all the
above factors, that enables the population to pay the cost of
substitution faster.

In other words, you achieved a higher substitution rate than Haldane,
because you used assumptions EVEN MORE WILDLY UNREALISTIC IN FAVOR of
evolution.

-- Walter ReMine
Haldane's Dilemma
http://SaintPaulScience.com/Haldane.htm


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Haldanes Dilemma - clarifications - and Felsenstein [LONG]
    ... Your simulation goes beyond that, to make even more wildly unrealistic ... In other words, your simulation begins with ONLY BENEFICIAL mutations, ... and drastically reduces the cost of mutation (the cost associated ...
    (sci.bio.evolution)
  • Cost of evolution again
    ... In March I posted a link to a simulation of Leonard Nunney's simulation ... simulation the mutations of interest are immediately beneficial, ... the species to substitute mutations. ... beneficial mutations are able to substitute ...
    (sci.bio.evolution)
  • Re: Choice of data structure for large event queues?
    ... > time-ordered event queues in a simulation. ... > balanced/ordered correctly for the more frequent enqueuing and dequeuing. ... be basically the cost of finding the element to be deleted. ... bucket, which is the same cost as choosing the minimum if the bucket ...
    (comp.programming)
  • Problem in a 3DOF aircraft model from Stevens and Lewis
    ... I just wrote the code from the book of Stevens & Lewis, Aircraft ... Control and Simulation, from chapter 3 of transport aircraft. ... % Cost Function for 3 DOF Aircraft ...
    (comp.soft-sys.matlab)